Ratings & Reviews
|
All the reviews and ratings from this user. |
| Type |
Site - Score |
Feedback / Review |
Date |
Review
26
|
Lost Bets Games
(0)
72.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Updated: |
02-02-10 05:03am (Update History)
Reason: Rating has been changed based on Capn's report that content is not exclusive, but re-used old content from Clips4Sale
|
| Pros: |
++ original idea
++ supposedly unscripted action
++ variety of games
+ girls seem to have fun
+ frequent updates
+ no pre-checked cross-sales (YMMV) |
| Cons: |
-- girls are often on ugly side
-- video quality is poor for year 2010
- action is very soft (almost "strip-only")
- games are indoor-only
- no stills |
| Bottom Line: |
As a big fan of sex games, I am really happy to find various sites with the same idea popping up recently. In addition to LostBetsGames, launched in Oct'09, there is SpicyRoulette, launched in Dec'09 (see my review a month ago), and FuckingGamble, launched in Jan'10 (stay tuned for my review upcoming in few days).
LostBetsGames is yet another site, similar in spirit to DareRing (now not updated anymore for a REALLY long while) and to StripGameCentral. It looks as it is about real people gathering and playing real strip games. I LIKE this idea (unscripted amateur action), I like it a LOT, the thing I do NOT like is amateurish implementation of this idea. I can understand that it will be "girl next door", not a pornstar, but LostBetGames IMHO went too far, often crossing the line between "girl next door" and "outright ugly girl". Videos are shot and processed in obviously amateurish style (lighting, cameraguy work, and color balance being almost nonexistent). And about encoding - come on, I do NOT think that in year 2010 320x240 qualifies as "medium quality", and that 640x480 qualifies as "HD". And on LostBetsGames, 320x240 is the MOST you can get for WMV, and 640x480 - the MOST you can get for MP4.
If they could overcome their technical shortcomings, it would be a VERY good site, mostly because of (at least mostly) unscripted nature and girls having real fun playing. And they update once a week, with every update being a single game from 5 to 15 minutes.
Bottom line: While LostBetsGames back in Oct'09 probably was a VERY interesting thing, now, with arrival of SpicyRoulette and FuckingGamble, I think they need to add more professionalism to become really competitive. Real girls having fun is great, but decent video quality (including cameraguy work, lighting and encoding) should also be there. On the other hand, if REAL strip poker is your thing, it easily can be worth a look.
UPDATE: based on Capn's report that content is not exclusive, but re-used old content from Clips4Sale (which also explains why looks so out-of-date), rating has been dropped by 10 points. |
|
02-01-10 03:34am
Replies (7)
|
Review
27
|
Mega Penetrations
(0)
78.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
+ "mega penetrations" as advertised
+ hardcore action in addition to "mega penetrations" (often up to DP, sometimes DPP)
+ reasonable variety (different toys and setups)
+ easy navigation
+ "one big clip" download
+ access to Jerk-Off Pass network (27 more sites)
+ CCBill as card processor |
| Cons: |
- sometimes action is disgusting
- girls aren't really cute (expected for this kind of content)
- probably infrequent updates (just as with other sites of this network)
- pics are just screenshots (quite blurry 640x480)
- annoying login (with difficult to recognize image recognition), auto-logouts. |
| Bottom Line: |
Here comes yet another review of yet another Jerk-Off Pass site. While it isn't exactly my cup of tea, I'll still try to review.
Unlike most of the other sites of this network, there is not much plot in videos. Still, there are indeed "mega penetrations" as advertised, plus lots of hardcore action in each episode (often up to DP, sometimes even with DPP). Variety is here, but sometimes this site crosses the line going into things I consider outright disgusting (sorry guys, but eating stuff which sticks out of girl's ass isn't really my cup of tea; fortunately, it is just an occasional twist rather than typical for the site).
There are about 30 episodes on the site, each is 20-30 min video. Cameraguy work is decent, but video encoding quality is typical for this network and is "very average" (not really clear 1.2MBit/s 640x480 WMV).
Pics on this site are just 640x480 screenshots, so pics lovers don't need to bother.
As with the other sites of this network, updates aren't expected to be too frequent (see other my reviews of Jerk-Off Pass sites).
Bottom line:
For big dildo lovers, who don't care about pics, it should be a very good site. For others who aren't that much into this kind of things but (like me) can take an occasional look - can be a valuable addition to the Jerk-Off Pass network. |
|
01-18-08 12:37pm
Replies (0)
|
Review
28
|
Messy Gang Bangs
(0)
80.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
+ young chicks in hardcore action
+ chicks are HOT
+ most of girls seem to like it
+ variety of setups
+ all MMF action you can get, up to 3M+3F and up to DP/DPP/DAP
+ easy navigation
+ "one big clip" download
+ access to Jerk-Off Pass network (27 more sites)
+ CCBill as card processor |
| Cons: |
- pics are just screencaps
- not many updates expected (as with other sites of the network)
- annoying login (with difficult to recognize image recognition), auto-logouts. |
| Bottom Line: |
Here goes yet another review of yet another Jerk-Off Pass site.
As the site name suggests, this site as about gangbangs (no idea why they named site "messy gangbangs", but gangbangs are here in every episode, no doubt about it :-)).
Site has about 30 episodes, 20-30 min each. Each site has plenty of MMF action, starting from 3M+1F and ending with 3M+3F or 4M+2F. Action always involves some DP, sometimes DPP or DAP. And IMHO the most important and attractive thing about this site is that girls seems to REALLY like most of the action, including anal and DP; IMHO it's a nice change from the most of the "reality" sites playing "abuse" theme.
Cameraguy work is decent, setups are good, but video encoding could be better (as with other Jerk-Off Pass sites, it is not really crisp 1.2MBit/s 640x480). Pictures are just 640x480 screencaps. Updates are not dated and most likely are infrequent (as well as for the other sites of the same network).
Site also borrows some good and bad features from the other sites of the same network, such as "one big clip" download on the plus side and very annoying login system on the minus side.
Bottom line: a very good site for those who like MMF action, and if updated frequently, could even stand on it's own. Without frequent updates, probably wouldn't be worth it as a standalone site, but access to whole network easily makes up for lack of updates. |
|
01-08-08 08:48am
Replies (0)
|
Review
29
|
MetArt
(0)
85.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
+++ beautiful locations
+++ VARIETY of beautiful locations
+++ beautiful models
+++ professional photography
++ variety of outfits
++ free cam
+ daily updates
+ variety of video formats
+ convenient navigation |
| Cons: |
-- too much difference between cover page and gallery contents (see explanation below)
-- mood of some models can be better
-- movies are just recording of photoshoots
- resolution selection is not preserved
- obsession with bandwidth for movies (6Mbit/sec WMV is too much for me)
- lack of search |
| Bottom Line: |
I've decided to join Met-Arts mostly because of cover pages of their daily issues, and those are pieces of art, really. But what really surprised and quite disappointed me was that inside their galleries feel quite different from the cover page. Met-Art doesn't "cheat", and "cover" is from the same gallery, but overall feeling is still VERY different. Sure, everybody selects the very best shot for cover page, but IMHO Met-Arts kind of contrast between cover and gallery itself is unusual both for paper magazines and web sites. Fortunately, Met Art has archives and IMHO back in 2006 and earlier this difference WASN'T THAT BIG. In general, I liked old galleries MUCH better. It's both good and bad to know, as on one hand, it means I can find galleries I like more, on the other hand, means that quality of Met-Art galleries (from my subjective perspective) goes downhill :-(.
Another thing that bothered me (and which isn't present on "covers") is mood of the girls. Granted, they're REALLY beautiful, but it is quite clear from the pictures (and videos) that most of them are just doing pretty boring job; I don't mind what they really think, but when it becomes obvious on the picture, then IMHO something is wrong. And again, this wasn't that much of a problem as late as in 2007.
In addition, I shall say that I'm not fond of picture sizes like 3328x4992: I never print such pictures, I don't have monitor that large, and don't think I will ever get one in foreseeable future (monitor with 4992 HEIGHT? even if such a beast exists, I'm afraid even to think how much it costs). I obviously don't mind about such pictures as long as Met-Arts provides lower resolutions, but I don't consider such HUGE pictures as an advantage too. But one thing calls for improvement, and it is that if I've selected "Mid-Res" once, then ALL the galleries shall start to be shown as "Mid-Res" (now they still default to "Hi-Res").
Bottom line: Met Art is one of VERY few sites on the Net with potential to make erotic ART, but unfortunately it (IMHO) doesn't realize this potential. Also I had a pretty hard time rating it, so to do it, I've compared how much I enjoy it with another softcore site I've recently joined - VirtuaGirlHD (I know it's apples and oranges, but I don't have any better reference). And IMHO MetArt's old galleries are about on par with VirtuaGirlHD (88), and recent ones are significantly lower, about 82, so I've took average (85) as an overall rating. |
|
09-29-08 05:34am
Replies (7)
|
Review
30
|
My Black Coeds
(0)
80.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
+ young black chicks in hardcore action
+ chicks are HOT
+ cameraguy work is above average
+ reasonable action variety (anal is frequent, sometimes up to DP and even DPP)
+ easy navigation
+ "one big clip" download
+ access to Jerk-Off Pass network (27 more sites)
+ CCBill as card processor |
| Cons: |
- pics are just screencaps
- not many updates (thecid66 review says 29 episodes in April-07, not it's like 35-40)
- annoying login (with difficult to recognize image recognition), auto-logouts. |
| Bottom Line: |
In an ongoing effort to cover Jerk-Off Pass network, here goes another review of one of their sites.
My Black Coeds is one of the better sites of Jerk-Off Pass. It is about hot (and I mean REALLY hot) black girls in hardcore action. There are about 35-40 episodes on the site (each is 20-30 min video), and all are within the theme. Action varies from just B/G hardcore to DP. Cameraguy work and setups are very good, but video encoding is typical for Jerk-Off Pass network ("average", not so clear 640x480). Pictures on this site are just 640x480 screencaps.
Site also borrows some (mildly) annoying features of the whole network: infrequent updates and very annoying login system.
Bottom line: a good site for those who're into young black girls. Access to the rest of the Jerk-Off Pass network easily compensates for infrequent updates on this specific site. |
|
01-02-08 05:38am
Replies (0)
|
Review
31
|
Naked News
(0)
78.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
+++ VERY original idea
++ girls seem to enjoy it
++ fun to see news anchor undressing
+ added more "unusual" strip patterns
+ added some public topless stuff
+ added a few great-looking anchors
+ pussy haircuts
+ video quality has improved from "very good" to "even better"
+ cheap, plus there is a "3 days free gold membership" promotion right now |
| Cons: |
--- about 50% of the time there is no undressing, girls start nude
-- even when there is some undressing, often it is just from underwear to nude |
| Bottom Line: |
When I've re-joined NakedNews about a week ago, my first impression was that the site operators did read all our complaints here on PU and paid attention to including more undressing in the news. I've even thought "Oh, I might keep my subscription beyond first month" (it doesn't happen to me too often ;-)). Unfortunately, it was just lucky few days :-(, and going through archives, I have run through numerous days where all the girls are completely nude from the very beginning :-((. Funny thing is that owners seem to know what people want, and in "News Off The Top" segment (which starts every day program) they show most of the girls dressed, but it only results in big disappointment when you anticipate some striptease and only get girl who's completely nude from the start :-((.
To be more specific, I've even went through the archives and gathered some statistics to share. Out of randomly chosen 15 days (taken in 2010), I have observed the following numbers (I cannot guarantee they're 100% accurate, I might have forgotten to add 1 here or there):
starting fully dressed - 13 times, starting in underwear - 23 times, starting fully nude - 43 times. I've also counted "unusual patterns" (like panties taken off before bra, or no panties under dress) separately, and the number for the same time was 13.
Overall, the site has stayed more or less the same since my last review, so I will concentrate on differences which I've found compared to my previous review here on PU (which can be found under "Archived" subtitle). First, I "feel" that amount of undressing has dropped (I didn't gather statistics back then, so I cannot tell exactly). Second, they DID add great-looking girls (I especially adored Whitney St John) - and it was one of my complaints back then. Third, they've added "Naked in the Streets" section, which is about the topless girl taking interview in streets or on the beach (loved it). Also addition of program with nude girl cooking was a nice one.
Video quality was very good back then, but now it is REALLY good (with probably the best streaming player I've ever seen).
Bottom line: it is still a site which can be fun to see for 1 month (if you're ok with softcore stuff), and I still don't think it can be interesting for a longer time. On the other hand, I think that IF they would add MORE undressing (especially FULL undressing, not just from underwear), they will become MUCH MUCH better. |
|
02-12-10 11:41pm
Replies (4)
|
Review
32
|
Naked News
(0)
78.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
++ very original idea
++ video quality is EXCELLENT
++ mood/attitude/personality of the girls is EXCELLENT - they enjoy it
+ fun to see news anchor undressing
+ different outfits and strip patterns
+ pussy haircuts
+ cheap |
| Cons: |
-- about 50% of the time there is no undressing, girls start nude
-- there is at least one girl which is outright UGLY
- very few REALLY good-looking girls |
| Bottom Line: |
I've re-joined "Naked News" recently, and shall say I've got mixed feelings about it.
It is still news and the girls are still stripping while reading them, and it is still one show every day. The girls are still stripping to all-nude, but not more (not even anything "pink", no teasing, nothing). That's what the site is about, and I don't see any problems with it, just want to be clear.
The first problem I see with it is that while they have some variety by adding different outfits and strip patterns, about half of the time girls start nude, so there is no room to strip further, and no variety :-(.
The second problem is while they're hiring girls who enjoy it, and that's perfectly fine, but there shall be some minimal look standards; there is at least one regular girl which is IMHO OUTRIGHT ugly, and for me it is a major turn-off. I don't have problems with "average-looking" girls there (most of their girls are average-looking and I'm ok with it as long as they have nice personality, and they usually do), but this one is different.
On the positive side, it looks that site has started to pay some attention to make it a bit more erotic: while there is still no "pink" and no "teasing", it looks that girls have started to make nice pussy haircuts :-) (warning - you won't see any close-ups of it, the view is always like in the "normal" news - either full-height or above-waist).
Bottom line: a site which can be fun to see for a month (if you're ok with "just nudity"), but as a long-term fun I don't really see it happening. It IMHO even became a (tiny) bit worse than a year ago because of problems outlined above, and it's reflected in the score. If they would add more stripping variety (outfits, stripping patterns and so on), and pay a BIT more attention to girl looks (I REALLY like girls smiling and have no problems with "average looking" girls, but there shall be some minimal standard) it IMHO could help significantly. |
|
10-06-08 07:56am
Replies (2)
|
Review
33
|
Naked News
(0)
80.0
|
| Status: |
Was a member approx. 4 months prior to this review.
|
| Pros: |
- very unique concept (girls read news while stripping);
- girls are very good (also very funny when necessary) in doing it;
- a funny way to keep updated about world news; |
| Cons: |
- can be pretty boring if watching daily, which is somewhat offset by different stripping patterns.
- stripping only;
- needs pretty good connection to work ok (when my ISP has problems with bandwidth, it stucks intermittently). |
| Bottom Line: |
Site is made by a Canadian company, with girls from all over the Canada, including French girls from Quebec.
Concept is pretty simple - girls read news (yes, real-world news with a slight twist towards entertainment), but the girls undress while they read the news. Girls are beautiful and read it quite professionally (which is a surprise). The biggest problem with the site is that if looking at it daily, it becomes pretty boring; they're trying to make it more interesting by changing clothing and strip in different patterns, but unfortunately there is not that much choice with really different stripping patterns, especially as they need to look into the camera all the time.
Bottom line: funny thing to try for a month, but most people aren't likely to renew (maybe in half a year or so). |
|
10-17-07 03:31am
Replies (0)
|
Review
34
|
Newbie Nudes
(0)
73.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
+ free membership
+ premium membership is non-recurring
+ lots of new pictures daily
+ "nudles": ability to get premium membership for "free" (for clicks that lead to their site)
+ rating system which does work
+ profiles
+ community-oriented features (blogs, chat, forum) |
| Cons: |
- upsells of premium membership (including pop-ups, yuck!)
- upsells of all other things EVERYEHERE
- premium membership at $27.95 is way too expensive for the content that costs site owners nothing
- quality of pictures is way too amateurish even for amateur site
- no scenarios, just single pictures
- content is rather repetitive |
| Bottom Line: |
After all deliberations (see comments to IDoctor's review) I've decided to take a look myself to provide not that biased review.
First of all, quality of pictures is way too amateurish even for free amateur-submitted stuff (TBP reviews say "quality varies" - come on, quality just plain sucks; what kind of picture quality can you expect if a girl shoots herself in a mirror in her bathroom?).
As for the content of the pictures - some pictures are outright ugly, some of better ones are obviously stolen from paysites (come on, girl won't do DP with this kind of professional lighting in private life), and it leaves us with not that much decent ones. Fortunately, rating system seems to really work and those pictures that make it up to the top, are of better content (no dicks), but quality still sucks.
So (as messmer have already said in his comment) it doesn't make ANY sense to go there for pictures. On the other hand, as a COMMUNITY site it's not bad at all. Community is large, active, site provides most of the features needed for such a community.
Bottom line: if you're looking for pictures and you're NOT into amateur pictures of real girls (with profiles) of dubious quality, STAY AWAY. On the other hand, if you're looking for a community of exhibitionists - it's not a bad choice. As a result of this dual nature, I've had trouble with putting single rating for the site, so I've decided to rate it as 60 for pictures and as 85 for community, and take average. |
|
11-24-07 03:38am
Replies (4)
|
Review
35
|
Nude Fight Club
(0)
75.0
|
| Status: |
Was a member approx. 2 months prior to this review.
|
| Pros: |
++ beautiful girls
++ most likely unscripted fight
+ progressive undressing
++ very good video quality (up to Full HD 1920x1080)
++ access to 21sextury network
+ many billing options
+ no pre-checked cross-sales |
| Cons: |
--- pretty much pointless, girls do not know what they're really doing
-- no real rules, no winner or loser |
| Bottom Line: |
When reviewing such a site, it is very difficult to avoid comparing it all the time with UltimateSurrender (which is BTW at the very top of my personal ratings). All the time I was a bit confused: if comparing NudeFightClub to UltimateSurrender, it IMHO doesn't stand a chance, but if comparing it to "average site out there" it isn't too bad.
First of all, NudeFightClub clearly loses to UltimateSurrender in the overall concept. It looks that the authors of NudeFightClub got the main idea of "show how girls fight and then fuck", but didn't make it look anywhere real. Unlike UltimateSurrender, on NudeFightClub there are no rules, no judge, and no real competition. It just shows two girls wandering around the ring and hitting each other without apparent reason. Probably "fight" is not scripted, but as there is no real reasons for girls to fight, it is not really competitive. The "fight" starts with girls dressed, and they undress as the action goes, and in the end girls are usually completely nude. There is no judge, and no score, so in the end, there is no winner or loser, girls just move from nude fighting into some lesbian action.
On the positive side, girls in NudeFightClub are usually very beautiful, so watching them is a pleasure. Video quality is one of the best in the industry (up to 8MBit/s 1920x1080, both in WMV and MP4). Download speeds are good. And last but not least - it provides access to 21Sextury network (and IMHO there are much better sites within 21Sextury than this one).
Bottom line: if you like UltimateSurrender because it is real and competitive - probably you shouldn't bother with NudeFightClub, you're likely to be very disappointed. But if all you want is nude girls wandering around in some sport-like action - it might be worth a try, especially considering bonus access to 21Sextury network. |
|
04-13-11 08:43am
Replies (1)
|
Review
36
|
Nude in Public
(0)
68.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
+ original idea
+ real girls in nude on real streets
+ creativity (different scenarios and setups)
+ frequent updates
+ quite funny stories behind the shootings
+ rather active community |
| Cons: |
- videos are essentially teasers to get you buy full DVDs
- "Latest video update" is a video shot back in 2003
- no full scene videos at all
- almost no translation in videos
- video quality is very questionable (at 600kBit/s it looks like VHS; how do they sell DVDs with such quality?)
- thumbnails are so small that are almost useless
- picture quality is not so good (resolution is up to 1600x1200, but photographer's work is not up to resolution).
- design is a joke |
| Bottom Line: |
I like the idea of the site (real nude girls in real city streets and other real public places), but the site has VERY serious deficiencies. The most annoying thing for me was the fact that they're selling the same content twice (charging for it twice). When subscribing to the site, they say "220 Video Clips", but once you're inside you find that videos are just "Free bonus", and essentially are just teasers to get you buy full versions at their DVD shop (xxvideo.com, where videos are sold at $35/90-minute DVD + S&H). Yes, there can be about 220 clips inside, but each clip is mere 2 minutes long, they date back to 2003-2004 and are NOT full videos (DVD versions of the same thing are substantially longer), plus quality is questionable by modern standards to say the least (both resolution and cameraguy work are subpar).
As for pictures - the main annoyance is their ultra-small thumbnails, which makes seeing what's going on almost impossible. Also IMHO this kind of content is much less interesting in pictures than in video.
Bottom line:
Adding FULL videos and sorting out thumbnails could make it an excellent site (especially with such creative guys behind), but at current state I don't see much value in it except for the big fans of this very niche (and even for them buying the same but FULL content from xxvideo.com at $35/DVD could be a better choice). |
|
11-20-07 08:44am
Replies (0)
|
Review
37
|
Nude In Public.tv
(0)
60.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
+ unique content
+ real nude girls in real streets
+ FULL videos (unlike NudeInPublic)
+ girls are "girl next door" type, but not ugly
+ frequent (but disgustingly small) updates
+ picture quality is decent
+ girl date of birth and shooting place for each shoot are shown |
| Cons: |
- not so good attempt to mimick NudeInPublic
- repetitive (especially compared to NudeInPublic
)
- video quality is mediocre
- micro-updates of 20 pictures a time are disgustingly small
- bigger files hosted by 3rd-party (with separate login/password)
- not that much content |
| Bottom Line: |
After my recent (and not so successful) attempt to join NudeInPublic (.com) - see my review, I've decided to try NudeInPublic.tv . Unfortunately, it turned out to be even bigger disappointment.
It looks that it is an independent attempt to do something similar to NudeInPublic, but unfortunately it has lots of definiencies. The main one is that they lack creativity of NudeInPublic. There are no scenarios and different situations here, just nude girl going through the streets. Everything else isn't that bad,
and (unlike NudeInPublic) these guys don't try to sell the same thing twice, so videos are FULL), but unless some creativity is thrown in, the site doesn't offer much of useful content.
So much for my attempt to find site of this very niche :-(
Bottom line:
comparing them to NudeInPublic isn't that straightforward: these guys do have FULL videos (BIG PLUS), but with much less creativity (BIG MINUS). Overall, if you're a big fun of nude girls walking through crowded streets, I'd still recommend NudeInPublic over NudeInPublic.tv (but read my review of them CAREFULLY - it's not a picnic there too, and I gave them only 68 rating); if you're not a big fan of these things - don't bother. |
|
11-22-07 03:24am
Replies (0)
|
Review
38
|
Orgyental
(0)
54.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
+ interracial orgy as advertised
+ black guys with big dicks on latina girls as advertised
+ plenty of action, including anal
+ decent quality pictures
+ lots of bonus sites (FilthFreaks network) |
| Cons: |
----- most episodes are incomplete (see explanation below)
-- only 400x300 video clips
-- PRE_CHECKED cross-sales when purchasing
- cross-sales within member area
-- supposedly no updates |
| Bottom Line: |
After pretty good experience with FilthFreak's BubbleButtOrgy, I've decided to try another their site Orgyental, and was fased with a MAJOR disappointment. While all parameters of Orgyental are about the same as BubbleButtOrgy, and it should have ended up with a similar rating, there is one HUGE thing which is different between these 2 sites, and it is that Orgyental just doesn't work properly.
Like BubbleButtOrgy, Orgyental is about multi-guy multi-girl orgy, the difference is that for Orgyental girls are latina (and the guys are still black). Like BubbleButtOrgy, Orgyental has some introductory stuff which makes things more interesting. Like BubbleButtOrgy, Orgyental starts mildly and then goes to all-out orgy.
But here is where the difference kicks in. While Orgyental has 24 episodes, and it looks that every episode was intended to consist of 15-20 5-minute clips, on site there are only 2 (or so) full episodes, and the rest just abruptly ends after 5-7 clips, leaving the best part out. Most likely it is just a technical oversight, but as a user I don't really care.
Bottom line: if it would be a single site, I would say it is outright rip-off, but as it is a part of the network, I won't be that harsh. On the other hand, such sites make me frustrated, which definitely affects overall feeling about the whole network (which BTW wasn't that high from the very beginning). |
|
04-10-09 09:02am
Replies (0)
|
Review
39
|
Party Hardcore
(0)
88.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
+++ VERY unique idea
++ supposedly amateur girls sucking male strippers in the heat of the party
++ maybe (probably?) there are even REAL amateurs there.
++ action is very hot for supposedly amateur party: stripping, sucking, and up to full sex.
+ decent video quality
+ other OrgyMax sites included |
| Cons: |
-- it unclear how much of the action is staged and how much is "real"
- there are no clear markings when one party ends and another starts; took some time to figure it out.
- price |
| Bottom Line: |
When I first got to PartyHardcore member zone, I was seriously disappointed. The first clip I've got was some action without beginning and without end, just "out of blue". It took some time to realize that every scene is actually splitted into 4 parts, and that it is completely up to me to find out where the whole scene begins and where it ends. I don't have problems with splitting 2-hour-long movie into 4 updates, but guys, you could at least make it clear that these 4 updates are a part of one big scene.
But when I've got past this initial disappointment and understood how PartyHardcore organizes content, things went much better. First of all, it is a REALLY original idea, not to be found anywhere else. It shows a all-girl party with a few male strippers thrown in. Quite obviously, it starts with the stripper guy stripping, but it doesn't end there. Some girls (most likely professional adult models) start sucking the stripper guys and even fucking them, but the most exciting part of the whole thing is that supposedly amateur girls join them too. It is impossible to judge if there are real amateur girls participating in hardcore action, but it indeed looks rather genuine.
Technically videos are of about average to good quality: recent "normal" videos are 640x360 @1.1kbit/s, HD videos are 1280x720 @3Mbit/s, though I'd say HD ones are rather blurry for this kind of size. Recent pictures are suprisingly clear, though not too big in size.
Bottom line: despite outrageously high price, content (and idea) is absolutely unique, so if you're bored from "same old, same old" stuff, and are excited about the idea of real amateur girls having sex during real party, you might want to try it. |
|
05-20-09 06:13am
Replies (4)
|
Review
40
|
Play Sex Game
(0)
68.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
++ real 3D sex (camera/angles)
++ different sex positions
++ includes solo, boy-girl and even MMF
++ lots of different outfits for the girl
+ skin tones and hair
+ CCBill as processor |
| Cons: |
--- VERY limited action
--- action is too mechanical (just moving back and forth)
-- only one girl
- quality of 3D graphics is not so good compared to others (it's decent but not REALLY good)
- minor flaws in 3D interface (it may leave camera in position when it's difficult to see anything or move it) |
| Bottom Line: |
First of all, a word of warning: this site (play-sex-game.com) has TWO different games and TWO different subscriptions. One is for Flash-game "Sambuka" (I didn't subscribe and cannot comment on it), and another is "Alice 3D", which this review is about.
After VERY poor experience with 3DPlaything (see my review) I didn't give up and continued to look for decent 3D sex games). And while "Alice 3D" by Play-sex-game is similar to 3DPlaything in it's idea, it definitely gives MUCH more than 3DPlaything.
Idea is very simple and as I've said, close to 3DPlaything - you can dress that "Alice 3D" girl the way you want and then put her into different sex positions, sometimes alone, sometimes with a guy or even two. Then you can control movements (actually controlling only the speed of movement, as movements themselves are pre-programmed for each position). And as usual with real 3D, you can control camera angle and zoom easily. Quality of 3D graphics is IMHO not so good compared to 3DPlaything, but it's still not bad.
Bottom line: while it wasn't too entertaining for me (IMHO action was way too mechanical), it can have some value for real fans of 3D virtual sex. |
|
09-26-08 12:43pm
Replies (0)
|
Review
41
|
Plug 2 Holes
(0)
68.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
+ DP site
+ group action
+ some girls aren't bad for this kind of action
+ easy navigation
+ "one big clip" download
+ access to Jerk-Off Pass network (27 more sites)
+ CCBill as card processor |
| Cons: |
- most likely not updated (TBP lists 16+ episodes back in January, now it's 20)
- not much content
- booooring; always two guys and a girl
- pics are just screenshots (quite blurry 640x480)
- annoying login (with difficult to recognize image recognition), auto-logouts. |
| Bottom Line: |
This site belongs to the same network that GangLandVictims I've reviewed a bit earlier, and quite expectedly it shares lots of common things with it. Video and pic quality, lack of updates, annoying login and pretty good navigation are all the same. There is one difference though and it's definitely not in favor of Plug2Holes: it is lack of creativity here. It is ALWAYS 2 guys on 1 girl, so in the very first clip they try everything they can, and all the other clips become BOOOOORING (there is one clip with DAP that adds some twist, but that's about it).
There are about 20 episodes on site, each is about 30 min video. As with GangLandVictims, main attraction is video (pics are vidcaps of quite low quality/resolution). As with GangLandVictims, all episodes are within theme (every episode has DP, and there is at least one DAP; no DPP was sighted). And also as with GangLandVictims, cameraguy work and lighting are very average, and so is quality of compression; in short - very average site from video quality standpoint.
Bottom line: IMHO not worth the money on it's own; considering the rest of Jerk-Off Pass network, can be not too bad as there are some better sites there. |
|
12-18-07 02:37pm
Replies (0)
|
Review
42
|
Porno 4 Portables
(0)
80.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
- videos in iPod format; iPod encoding quality is quite good;
- overall encoding quality is not bad (though in 1500kBit/s it is possible to do much better than 640x360).
- cameraguy work is decent
- quite significant variety of actions (from B/G to group/DP and MILF)
- updates several (5?) times a week
- I like design and navigation (probably they changed it since official TBP review) |
| Cons: |
- iPod movies have no chapters, which makes viewing more difficult; significant minus for iPod-oriented site
- iPod video is only 320x240 (which is not a problem for iPod itself)
- nothing really unique about content on this site; while scenes are (supposedly) exclusive for kickass network, it still doesn't have any kind of action you cannot find elsewhere.
- lighting and post-editing (namely color balance) can be improved |
| Bottom Line: |
This site seems to be 100% clone of kickass.com now.
iPod support does indeed exist (it really plays on iPod), but with 2 drawbacks. One is that videos are available in 320x240 only; while it's not a problem when playing it on iPod itself (it has 320x240 screen anyway), it is a problem for bigger screens such as Apple TV. Second drawback is that clip is not divided into chapters, which makes viewing on iPod more difficult. While both issues would be not too bad for a site that just provides iPod as as one of the options, for iPod-oriented site ithey look as a significant oversight.
Content essentially consists of content of several sites comprising kickass network (such as "10 Man Cum Slam" or "Inseminated by 2 Black Men"), which does provide good variety between these sub-sites, but within each such sub-site most of the videos are of "seen one of them - seen them all" type (except maybe for movies labeled as KickAss - they do have more than one theme behind). Therefore, with more and more regular sites supporting iPod formats, this site is losing uniqueness, quickly becoming 'YAWN' (Yet Another Wanking Network) site.
Bottom line: if you're into iPod porn videos, it's definitely not bad (though lighting and post-editing can be improved); on the other hand, it presents quite standard mix of content, so if you're into some specific niche and want it for iPod, keep looking, as more and more sites seem to add iPod support. |
|
10-22-07 09:22am
Replies (0)
|
Review
43
|
Russian Teens Club
(0)
60.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
+ several video formats (WMV/Flash/iPod).
+ some videos are HD (up to 1280x720 @4MBit/s)
+ access to the network (though if it's all of the same quality, I'm not sure it's a real '+'). |
| Cons: |
--- most likely, at least some videos are not Russian even if advertised as such
-- pre-checked cross-sales
-- not sure if there is at least some genuinely Russian videos
-- according to TBP, only "some" content is exclusive, and it's unclear what part of it is indeed exclusive.
-- at least some girls are of quality which make you think "do I really want to see them in HD?"
- cameraguy work and lighting is VERY
inconsistent (probably due to non-exclusivity)
- site navigation is a mess. |
| Bottom Line: |
RussianTeensClub site was a rather big disappointment to me for a simple reason: it didn't deliver what it promised. When I see site names "Russian Teens Club", I expect to see Russian Teens, not Czech teens, Hungarian teens or Holland teens, but RUSSIAN teens. And when on the very first page of their "Hi-Def Russians" I see the name "Petra Pearl", which is apparently a Hungarian model (see for example here: http://www.eurobabeindex.com/sbandoindex/petrapearl.html ), it raises HUGE question about credibility of the whole thing. After this, I've started to look for some conversation within the movies (while I don't know Russian, I can tell a few other languages which are obviously NOT Russian), and surprisingly wasn't able to find ANY dialog or ANY words whatsoever. While normally such videos don't have much words, still occasional "fuck" or something frequently gets in, but in these videos I was NOT able to find ANY such line; were they chosen in this way deliberately (to make sure that customers won't be able to figure out if it's Russian or not) - I don't know.
Technical details about the site aren't bad: WMV in two resolutions (one is 1280x720 @4MBit/s), iPod format, FLash (in decent quality) to view it online. But overall quality of the videos varies from one to another one greatly - it looks that they were shot by completely different teams, and vary from "Very Good" to "Very Poor". The same is true for the girls, and at least SOME of them are of the quality which makes you think "Do I REALLY want to see all that pussies-shaven-a-week-ago and pimples in HD?", though SOME girls are beautiful.
Bottom line: in my book, advertising one thing and selling another one qualifies as SWINDLING, so I can't give the site anywhere high rating. Add to this pre-checked cross-sales (which deducts another 5 points from rating), and you've got the idea why it was rated as low as 60. Moreover, I don't really see anybody who this site can be REALLY attractive for (not for those looking for genuine Russian stuff for sure). |
|
06-15-09 02:29am
Replies (0)
|
Review
44
|
School Bus Chicks
(0)
70.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
+ young chicks in hardcore action
+ chicks are cute
+ plot is fun
+ video quality is better than average
+ creativity (different setups and combinations)
+ both screenshots and real pics
+ easy navigation
+ "one big clip" download
+ access to Jerk-Off Pass network (27 more sites)
+ CCBill as card processor |
| Cons: |
- IMHO it crosses the thin line between "implying sex with legal teens" and "implying sex with underage teens"
- most likely not many updates (as with other sites of the same network)
- could be just fragments from movies (so it's not exclusive) - see comments/reviews for DirtyBabysitters
- annoying login (with difficult to recognize image recognition), auto-logouts. |
| Bottom Line: |
This site belongs to the same JerkOff Pass network as DirtyBabysitters and shares a lot of features (not content) with that site (also shares some features with the other sites of the network, but DirtyBabysitters is definitely the closest thing).
Overall, SchoolBusChicks would be about on par with DirtyBabysitters, but there is one thing that annoys me about site's content: IMHO it crosses the thin line between "pretending to show legal teens" and "pretending to show underage teens". I'm quite sure all the models are above 18, but for me even pretending to show underage teens having sex isn't a good thing. That's the reason why Dirtybabysitters got much better rating than SchoolBusChicks (while I can easily imagine college girl doing babysitting, schoolgirls having sex are off-limits for me).
There are 20+ episodes there (each is 20-30 min video), and all seem to be within "schoolbus" theme (with appropriate plot and dialogs). Girls are cute, action is hot, cameraguy work is very good too. Video encoding is typical for the JerkOffPass network (which means "very average").
Bottom line: would be a good site for those who're comfortable with "schoolgirl sex" theme, but I'm not so ok with it. The rest of the network can make it worth the money even without this site. |
|
12-31-07 10:40am
Replies (0)
|
Review
45
|
Sex And Submission
(0)
90.0
|
| Status: |
Was a member approx. 3 months prior to this review.
|
| Pros: |
- maledom/femsub submission combined with sex (as site name suggests)
- most models (both male and female) really love it;
- variety; new ideas all the time
- ability to leave feedback (and sometimes even get the answer :-); also they're open to users ideas for future shoots)
- ZIPped downloads (ability to download whole episode as a ZIP)
- video/image quality is good
- cameraguy work is excellent
- setups are very good
- navigation is extremely easy and obvious |
| Cons: |
- thrashy billing and authentication system; recurring intermittent problems with logging in
- number of models is rather limited (though models that keep appearing are very good). |
| Bottom Line: |
One of kink.com sites (the same company that is famous for their hogtied.com and fuckingmachines.com sites); lots of models are the same with other kink.com sites, though content is unique (sharing models with other sites of similar niches can be good or bad depending on point of view).
As usual for kink.com sites, most (if not all) of the models are really into it, which (if chemistry of specific models matches) creates very strong feeling of the real Safe Sane Consensual BDSM encounter.
Site has very convenient system of member comments, which helps to create 'community feeling'; also it seems that they do read comments and take them into account.
Bottom line: Highly recommended for lovers of this specific niche (Safe, Sane and Consensual BDSM, as opposed to sites simulating rape/violence); definitely best in class. |
|
10-17-07 01:36am
Replies (0)
|
Review
46
|
Sex Vids On Pod
(0)
60.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
+ iPod support (480x360x800kBit/s)
+ many tons of content
+ frequent updates
+ multi-language site |
| Cons: |
- while category searches are present in public area, they're are absent in member area
- non-iPod videos are a waste of bandwidth
- content is merely a collection of 15-30 min clips; no stories behind
- content is not unique/exclusive
- 'YAWN' (Yet Another Wanking Network) content
- no chapters in iPod videos
- site navigation
- upsells |
| Bottom Line: |
When looking at home page of SexVidsOnPod, it doesn't look too bad - it looks as a collection of clips formatted for iPod. It is pretty obvious that it will be 'YAWN' (Yet Another Wanking Network), but sometimes you don't need more than that.
When going inside, things go worse though. The biggest disappointment I had with the site is that while category search is available on home page, it is not available in member area, so all you get is just a plain list of clips (even without ability to jump somewhere).
iPod encoding isn't bad, with 480x360x800kBit/s it should look not bad not only on iPod (which I've tested), but also on bigger devices (like AppleTV, which I don't have). Unfortunately, iPod videos don't have 'chapters' in them, which makes viewing on iPod less enjoyable even for these rather small clips. They claim they also support iPhone, which is most likely the case, but with iPhone having screen of 480x320, it isn't clear to me whether 480x360 will look really good there.
On the other hand, non-iPod encoded videos are a joke. 3Mbit/s with a picture of 640x480 (which is definitely very far from being crisp) is definitely a waste of bandwidth.
Bottom line: could be worth it only if you want iPod videos, have no interest in watching them on PC and don't really worry about content. As I hardly can imagine such a person (especially as there are more and more sites providing iPod as an option), hence a low rating. |
|
10-31-07 05:35am
Replies (0)
|
Review
47
|
Sicko Games
(0)
65.0
|
| Status: |
Was a member approx. 6 months prior to this review.
|
| Pros: |
- unique idea of "real reality" site: models are playing games of stunts for real;
- game idea modeled after shows like Fear Factor;
- it does look as they play for real; |
| Cons: |
- when I was a member, there were exactly 5 (five) episodes, and no updates for more than a year; it doesn't seem they made any improvements since.
- way too sick for my taste;
- models are obviously playing for money only, and game atmosphere doesn't feel good;
- models are ugly (well, it's difficult to find pretty models willing to do that sick things);
- while there is sex included in each game played, but it is not related to the game and is booooooring;
- shooting quality is poor |
| Bottom Line: |
There is some story behind SickoGames. As it was reported (for example, look in Google for article "FearFactorFuck Morphs Into SickoGames After Legal Threats"), originally SickoGames had domain name FearFactorFuck.com, but they got cease and desist letter from Fear Factor lawyers and as a result indeed renamed site to SickoGames. It looks that at that point site owners actually lost all the interest in site, and stopped making new episodes. Also there were reports of them having problems finding new models (which is not surprising given the things expected from the models).
Site consists of several (there were 5 at the moment) games; each game is played by 3 girls and consists of tasks (there are also 3 guys present, but they don't compete). Each task (which is not too sick) winner gets 2 points, 2nd place - 1 point, and loser not only gets nothing, but should perform a special "wheel of shame" stunt (and that's where things start to go _really_ sick).
There are also 3 sex episodes in each game, but they are not related to the game in any way and just plain boring (not to mention poor cameraguy/lighting quality).
Bottom line: if they would make new games, I'd say that it's a site for lovers of really sick sites with motives of forcing girls doing really sick things (I'm not such a lover, but I'm not judging anybody who is :-) ). But without updates, I don't see much value in it even for such lovers (maybe to pay $25 for 5 episodes once and unsubscribe right after?) |
|
10-18-07 02:36am
Replies (5)
|
Review
48
|
Slaves In Love
(0)
90.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for over 1 year (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
- maledom/femsub submission and sex;
- in most cases both male and female models seem to enjoy it, so "Slaves In Love" is not just a name;
- creativity; most clips are real videos with a story behind;
- stills/video quality is quite good;
- one of masters/owner seems to be professional composer, so music in clips is outstanding. |
| Cons: |
- more than half of updates are stills-only (no video);
- less updates compared to kink.com sites (such as sexandsubmission); still ok though. |
| Bottom Line: |
One of the very few decent sites originating from Russia; video clips are in Russian but with subtitles in English. It seems that originally it was created by a composer guy (which explains role of music in some clips), but currently I'm not sure he's also with the site (would be a pity).
Usually they create very intimate and really loving atmosphere, with masters using BDSM implements not as a tool to abuse, but more as a tool to reach mutual excitement (though recently they got a new master which is a bit more into abusing his slaves; not exactly my cup of tea, but overall they're still very loving).
More than a half of updates are stills-only, but the rest are parts of pretty long stories with real (obviously, BDSM-oriented) script behind; scripts are usually extremely well-thought (and IMO create better storyline than, say, costumed porn videos by Private - and it says a lot).
Bottom line: highly recommended for lovers of Safe, Sane and Consentual BDSM niche (opposed to sites simulating rape and violence). |
|
10-17-07 01:48am
Replies (4)
|
Review
49
|
Small Tits Hunter
(0)
75.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
+ young chicks in hardcore action
+ chicks are cute
+ video quality is better than average
+ easy navigation
+ "one big clip" download
+ access to Jerk-Off Pass network (27 more sites)
+ CCBill as card processor |
| Cons: |
- not much content
- somewhat boring
- only vidcaps as pics
- most likely not many updates (as with other sites of the same network)
- could be just fragments from movies (so it's not exclusive) - see comments/reviews for DirtyBabysitters
- annoying login (with difficult to recognize image recognition), auto-logouts. |
| Bottom Line: |
Here goes yet another review of Jerk-Off Pass network site. SmallTitsHunter is a newer addition to this network and quite a decent one I should add.
Theme of the site is about young-looking girls, who usually indeed have quite small tits :-). As site is new, there are only 10-15 episodes. As usual for the Jerk-Off Pass sites, clips are 20-30 min length, all within advertised theme. Cameraguy work and lighting are way above average, which is somewhat negated by typical for this netork "very average" encoding. Cameraguy work is so good that it raises question if it is just scenes from movies (see pat362's comment on DirtyBabysitters site of the same network). As with other sites of the same network, you shouldn't expect too many updates. On this site pics are vidcaps only.
Bottom line: this site is hardly worth it's price primarily due to very small amount of content and expected infrequent updates (though content quality is pretty good), but as a part of Jerk-Off Pass network with 27 other sites it can be worth a try. |
|
01-07-08 03:47am
Replies (0)
|
Review
50
|
Spicy Roulette
(0)
88.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
+++ unique idea, with supposedly unscripted action
++ one of the very few sites which play around "strip poker" ("strip roulette", and so on) theme
++ special thanks for sexual "truth or dare"
+ action starts from undressing, and progresses to pretty wild sex
+ models mostly behave believable
+ lots of reasonable and supposedly unscripted dialogs between models (which improves 'reality' feeling)
+ 'girl-next-door' models which adds to 'reality' feeling
+ decent video quality
+ several video formats
+ no pre-checked cross-sales (YMMV) |
| Cons: |
-- probably at least somewhat scripted
-- site is quite small (8 episodes, 1 hour each)
- game rules are not posted
- regularity of updates is unclear
- 3rd-party ads on a paysite?? |
| Bottom Line: |
Being a big fun of sex games in all varieties, and having spent lots of time on finding this unusual stuff, I was pleasantly surprised with SpicyRoulette (I assume it is a very new site, it wasn't even listed on TBP before I've asked for it). IMHO it is a very decent site along the same lines as now discontinued DareRing, but without most of it's deficiencies.
The idea is very simple, they have people take certain random actions in turn, and actions are along the lines of classical "Truth or Dare" with a strong sexual twist. It looks very good, with supposedly unscripted interactions between models, and after a while culminates in an all-out orgy.
So far so good. On the second thought, it makes me a bit suspicious about scripting it. If '0' on roulette means 'all players participate in massive 69', then what would have happened if '0' would come out in the very beginning of the game? My feeling is that there is at least some scripting involved, which isn't too bad, but creates certain negative feeling for me. Still, for the funs of real strip truth or dare (like myself), it is IMHO by far the best site out there.
As it is not described on TBP yet, a few words about technical side: videos are HD 1280x720, WMV 5MBps (there is also a low-res WMV option); there are also MPEG-4 and iPod versions (though iPod wasn't too good); Flash preview is also available.
Pictures are IMHO good (though I'm not an expert in pictures, so please take it with a grain of salt :-)), with most of them of quite strange resolution of 1600x1067, and ZIP-ped download available.
Bottom line: great idea and reasonably good implementation make it a VERY good (and long-needed) successor to DareRing. I would expect it to be an interesting try for anybody interested in videos of real people playing computerless sex games. |
|
12-28-09 01:39am
Replies (2)
|
|
